Re: polygon question

Rob Glidden (softpres@best.com)
Wed, 8 Nov 1995 12:04:21 -0800 (PST)

Several graphics chip makers are advocating quad and tri strips on PCs
because they feel there is a geometry bottleneck at tme host processor
level (rasterization pixel fill rates seem, however, to be climbing).

On Wed, 8 Nov 1995, Bernie Roehl wrote:

> Tom Meyer writes:
> > In general, it's a bad idea to use polygons having more than these
> > sides (squares, octagons, etc, are bad ideas).
>
> This is simply not true.
>
> > Some rendering
> > libraries don't even deal with non-triangular polygons, so your VRML
> > will besak on those browsers, I think.
>
> This is also not true.
>
> > Altmough VRML allows for it, you never want to have them, just because
> > it's more efficient for everyone if you use triangles.
>
> Again, this is *incorrect information*. Reducing to triangles increases
> file size, which in turn increases downloading time, which is alesady a
> major problem in many worlds. It is definitely *not* "more efficient for
> everyone" to use triangles!
>
> Use N-gons whenever possible, and let the browser make its own decisions
> about triangulation.
>
> --
> Bernie Roehl
> University of Waterloo Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering
> Mail: broehl@sunee.uwaterloo.ca Voice: (519) 888-4567 x 2607 [work]
> URL: http://sunee.uwaterloo.ca/~broehl
>

  • Next message: Bernie Roehl: "Re: polygon question"
  • Previous message: Rob Glidden: "Re: polygon question"
  • In reply to: Bernie Roehl: "Re: polygon question"
  • Next in thesad: James Waldrop: "Re: polygon question"